Pormal na rekisito sa balidong kasal ang marriage license

ni Atty. Persida Rueda-Acosta - @Magtanong Kay Attorney | December 22, 2021

Dear Chief Acosta,

Ang kaibigan ko na mayroon nang asawa ay muling nag-asawa. Buhay pa ang kanyang unang asawa, ngunit ang sabi niya ay matagal naman na diumano silang hiwalay at ang alam niya ay wala silang marriage license noong sila ay ikinasal sa huwes.

Mayroon kasing nakapagsabi sa kanya na wala diumanong bisa ang kasal kung wala ang naturang marriage license. Totoo ba iyon? – Matty

Dear Matty,

Ang marriage license ay isa sa mga pormal na rekisito sa balidong kasal na kung wala nito ay walang bisa ang kasal. Nakasaad sa Article 3 at 4 ng Family Code of the Philippines:

“Art. 3. The formal requisites of marriage are:

(1) Authority of the solemnizing officer;

(2) A valid marriage license except in the cases provided for in Chapter 2 of this title;

(3) A marriage ceremony which takes place with the appearance of the contracting parties before the solemnizing officer and their personal declaration that they take each other as husband and wife in the presence of not less than two witnesses of legal age.

Art. 4. The absence of any of the essential or formal requisites shall render the marriage void ab initio, except as stated in Article 35 (2).”

(Binigyang-diin)

Gayunman, hindi maaaring ang mga partido lamang ang magdedeklara na walang bisa ang kanilang kasal, kahit pa sadyang wala ang rekisito na nakasaad sa batas.

Kinakailangang maghain ng petisyon sa hukuman at maglabas ng deklarasyong walang bisa ang kasal bago sila muling makapagpakasal. Batay sa Article 40 ng Family Code: “The absolute nullity of a previous marriage may be invoked for purposes of remarriage on the basis solely of a final judgment declaring such previous marriage void.”

Kung ang taong may-asawa ay magpapakasal nang pangalawa, maaari siyang makasuhan ng bigamy. Ipinaliwanag ng ating Korte Suprema sa kasong Lasanas vs. People of the Philippines (G.R. No. 159031, June 23, 2014, Ponente: Honorable former Chief Justice Lucas P. Bersamin) ang sumusunod:

“x x x “What makes a person criminally liable for bigamy,” according to People v. Odtuhan:

x x x is when he contracts a second or subsequent marriage during the subsistence of a valid marriage. Parties to the marriage should not be permitted to judge for themselves its nullity, for the same must be submitted to the judgment of competent courts and only when the nullity of the marriage is so declared can it be held as void, and so long as there is no such declaration, the presumption is that the marriage exists.

Therefore, he who contracts a second marriage before the judicial declaration of nullity of the first marriage assumes the risk of being prosecuted for bigamy.x x x As we stated in Tenebro v. Court of Appeals:

There is therefore a recognition written into the law itself that such a marriage, although void ab initio, may still produce legal consequences.

Among these legal consequences is incurring criminal liability for bigamy.

To hold otherwise would render the State's penal laws on bigamy completely nugatory, and allow individuals to deliberately ensure that each marital contract be flawed in some manner, and to thus escape the consequences of contracting multiple marriages, while beguiling throngs of hapless women with the promise of futurity and commitment.”

Nawa’y nasagot namin ang inyong mga katanungan. Nais naming ipaalala sa inyo na ang opinyong ito ay nakabase sa inyong mga naisalaysay sa inyong liham at sa pagkakaintindi namin dito. Maaaring maiba ang opinyon kung mayroong karagdagang impormasyon na ibibigay. Mas mainam kung personal kayong sasangguni sa abogado.

Maraming salamat sa inyong patuloy na pagtitiwala.